Comparative 2D-shape analyses of collared lemmings in the zone of possible sympatry between <i>Dicrostonyx groenlandicus</i> and <i>Dicrostonyx richardsoni</i> (Rodentia, Arvicolinae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Morphological differentiation and relationships among collared lemmings (Dicrostonyx Gloger, 1841) remain unclear. This issue is particularly important in the Kivalliq Region, Nunavut, Canada, where Dicrostonyx groenlandicus (Traill, 1823) and Dicrostonyx richardsoni Merriam, 1900 ranges overlap. Possible sympatry of both species obscures the taxonomic status of collared lemmings from this area. We compared 2D outline shapes of the skull and three upper molars of collared lemmings collected from seven areas of the Canadian Arctic, including specimens from the Baker Lake – Aberdeen Lake area, in the Kivalliq Region, and Dicrostonyx hudsonius (Pallas, 1778) as an outgroup. Multivariate analyses revealed two distinct groups when considering the molars: D. hudsonius, and the remainder of lemmings. Dicrostonyx richardsoni, D. groenlandicus, and the lemmings from the Baker Lake – Aberdeen Lake area showed significant differences, especially when considering skull shapes, thus suggesting three distinct groups. However, skull shapes proved inefficient in discriminating between species. These differences suggest that collared lemmings from the Baker Lake – Aberdeen Lake area may not be correctly assigned to either of the two species without further genetic evaluation. They also suggest that these lemmings should have a peculiar taxonomic status. Our study calls for further taxonomical investigations for collared lemmings from the overlapping distribution ranges of D. groenlandicus and D. richardsoni.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".